It could be argued that TT's big mistake was hiring MM rather than Sean Payton. But then again, hindsight is always 20/20; and, of course, hindsight changes with the political/social whims of the times. If Cobb had been allowed to walk, and done well with another team (ala Hayward), we'd still be pointing that out as a big mistake. Its all relative.

I know that MM was said to be the pick at HC because of his history in GB. I also know that SP reportedly preferred NO. That being said, we know how both teams, and candidates, work the press as one, or the other, loses interest in the job/hire. I doubt that we will ever know if SP was actually preferred by GB or if he preferred NO.

One thing we do know, SP evolved his offense over time. His use of Hill proves this. Separately, It appears that TT greatly emasculated MM by ruling GB with an iron fist. Players noticed this. MM had difficulty holding the team accountable because he could not hold tough practices, play key players in pre-season, call players out etc. He lost his authority.

TT "ruled GB with an iron fist"? OK. So, if you have some sources who could back this up, please share them. If this is a personal opinion, fine. That's another matter. It seemed that MM and AR had some conflicts from time to time, and that it finally came to a head this year. And the stubborness and extreme loyalty (are the traits interdependent?) were also obvious problems. So, it wouldn't have matter who the HC was? That Payton would have been handcuffed by TT's "iron fist"? I respectfully disagree. Other said years ago that MM should go. I disagreed. I was wrong. Hopefully, I'll be more adaptable and open to new ideas, rather than stubborn and too loyal.

It could be argued that TT's big mistake was hiring MM rather than Sean Payton. But then again, hindsight is always 20/20; and, of course, hindsight changes with the political/social whims of the times. If Cobb had been allowed to walk, and done well with another team (ala Hayward), we'd still be pointing that out as a big mistake. Its all relative.

I know that MM was said to be the pick at HC because of his history in GB. I also know that SP reportedly preferred NO. That being said, we know how both teams, and candidates, work the press as one, or the other, loses interest in the job/hire. I doubt that we will ever know if SP was actually preferred by GB or if he preferred NO.

One thing we do know, SP evolved his offense over time. His use of Hill proves this. Separately, It appears that TT greatly emasculated MM by ruling GB with an iron fist. Players noticed this. MM had difficulty holding the team accountable because he could not hold tough practices, play key players in pre-season, call players out etc. He lost his authority.

Where was it reported that Peyton preferred NO? I remember reading that he really wanted the GB job. It was one of the most coveted jobs in the league at the time.

Logged

"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."

I have no doubt ya’ll would have been extremely patient during the three seasons in a row the Saints put up losing records. Or having more losing seasons in his tenure than McCarthy. Or during Bounty-Gate. Or having won “ONLY” one Super Bowl with a Hall of Fame QB that owns nearly every major passing record. Or the fact they only made it to one SB. Certainly there would have been no comments that his time has grown stale during his 12 year coaching tenure in one place. No comments or whispers about his and Brees’ relationship during some contentious contract disputes by Brees. No somehow placing blame on Payton for his safety’s epic mistake against Minny in the playoffs. Nope - it would have been ride or die with Payton. I’m sure of it.

It could be argued that TT's big mistake was hiring MM rather than Sean Payton. But then again, hindsight is always 20/20; and, of course, hindsight changes with the political/social whims of the times. If Cobb had been allowed to walk, and done well with another team (ala Hayward), we'd still be pointing that out as a big mistake. Its all relative.

I know that MM was said to be the pick at HC because of his history in GB. I also know that SP reportedly preferred NO. That being said, we know how both teams, and candidates, work the press as one, or the other, loses interest in the job/hire. I doubt that we will ever know if SP was actually preferred by GB or if he preferred NO.

One thing we do know, SP evolved his offense over time. His use of Hill proves this. Separately, It appears that TT greatly emasculated MM by ruling GB with an iron fist. Players noticed this. MM had difficulty holding the team accountable because he could not hold tough practices, play key players in pre-season, call players out etc. He lost his authority.

TT "ruled GB with an iron fist"? OK. So, if you have some sources who could back this up, please share them. If this is a personal opinion, fine. That's another matter. It seemed that MM and AR had some conflicts from time to time, and that it finally came to a head this year. And the stubborness and extreme loyalty (are the traits interdependent?) were also obvious problems. So, it wouldn't have matter who the HC was? That Payton would have been handcuffed by TT's "iron fist"? I respectfully disagree. Other said years ago that MM should go. I disagreed. I was wrong. Hopefully, I'll be more adaptable and open to new ideas, rather than stubborn and too loyal.

Bill Michaels

Logged

The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will. - Vince Lombardi

It could be argued that TT's big mistake was hiring MM rather than Sean Payton. But then again, hindsight is always 20/20; and, of course, hindsight changes with the political/social whims of the times. If Cobb had been allowed to walk, and done well with another team (ala Hayward), we'd still be pointing that out as a big mistake. Its all relative.

I know that MM was said to be the pick at HC because of his history in GB. I also know that SP reportedly preferred NO. That being said, we know how both teams, and candidates, work the press as one, or the other, loses interest in the job/hire. I doubt that we will ever know if SP was actually preferred by GB or if he preferred NO.

One thing we do know, SP evolved his offense over time. His use of Hill proves this. Separately, It appears that TT greatly emasculated MM by ruling GB with an iron fist. Players noticed this. MM had difficulty holding the team accountable because he could not hold tough practices, play key players in pre-season, call players out etc. He lost his authority.

Where was it reported that Peyton preferred NO? I remember reading that he really wanted the GB job. It was one of the most coveted jobs in the league at the time.

Bill Michaels. I also said that it may have been put out there by his people after TT went for MM. no one really knows what happened first.

« Last Edit: January 19, 2019, 02:15:39 PM by #66 »

Logged

The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will. - Vince Lombardi

As far as controlling who would play in the exhibition season, since TT would ultimately have the final decision on who would make the squad, probably with input from others (speculation), then he would want to see the players he thought had the best chance to make the squad in some manner play in games that would come as close as possible to simulating real games. So, maybe that's ominous, or maybe its normal across the league.

No, he did not call the plays etc. I don’t understand the need to be fecetious.

What I am also referring to is the lack of accountability and excessive complacency that clearly was displayed by the team and articulated by the leadership council. MM lost his authority with the team when he could no longer demand more physical practices etc. He could not discipline players the way that he wanted to. Players are smart enough to know who is calling the shots. Players got comfortable. TT had a hand in this from what I have been listening to. Gutekunst had several times the number of players audition for roles through the season than TT ever did. He has brought more competition and the players want this - at least the leaders do. I encourage you to listen to the same podcasts. I would be interested on your take afterwards.

Logged

The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will. - Vince Lombardi

No, he did not call the plays etc. I don’t understand the need to be fecetious.

What I am also referring to is the lack of accountability and excessive complacency that clearly was displayed by the team and articulated by the leadership council. MM lost his authority with the team when he could no longer demand more physical practices etc. He could not discipline players the way that he wanted to. Players are smart enough to know who is calling the shots. Players got comfortable. TT had a hand in this from what I have been listening to. Gutekunst had several times the number of players audition for roles through the season than TT ever did. He has brought more competition and the players want this - at least the leaders do. I encourage you to listen to the same podcasts. I would be interested on your take afterwards.

The comments weren't meant to be facetious. What the Packers have is a delegation of authority. The GM will draft players, select the final roster (again, hopefully this will be done with input from others, including the HC, OC and DC, at a minimum). The GM will also handle things like player evaluation on a regular basis. The three people mentioned above would be doing this, as well as position coaches, of course. Now, as to when and why the players became complacent, that seems to have been a team problem. Blame has to equally go to MM, TT amd Mark Murphy. This seems to be changing under Gutekunst- trading Burnett wven though the backups were not ready; getting rid of Montgomery after the Rams debacle; and some additions in FA. The FA moves haven't worked very well, but at least he took some swings, which TT has not done for a while. Yes, Peppers and Woodson were great additions, as was Cook to a lesser extent. But to blame TT exclusively while giving MM a pass on a stale offense, keeping around underperforming assistants (Capers and Zook in particular), and just plain being stuck on the same offense when it clearly needed revamping, no, I don't buy it. Lots of blame to go around. Sometimes a coach can be successful for years, like Belichick in NE or Payton in NO. Sometimes not, like Lewis in Cincy or Tomlin in Pitt. And, sure, I'd be happy to listen to the podcasts. Could you give me the dates or some indication of which podcasts are Packer related? Or is it a mixed bag?

I have no doubt ya’ll would have been extremely patient during the three seasons in a row the Saints put up losing records. This assumes the Packers would also have had losing seasons under Payton. The Packers had a significantly better team, and therefore turned things around quickly after a slow start the first season under Rodgers. Why wouldn't Payton have had the same success as MM? Or having more losing seasons in his tenure than McCarthy. Same question. Or during Bounty-Gate. Or having won “ONLY” one Super Bowl with a Hall of Fame QB that owns nearly every major passing record. Which is the same number of SB wins MM had with Favre AND Rodgers. Or the fact they only made it to one SB. Ditto. Certainly there would have been no comments that his time has grown stale during his 12 year coaching tenure in one place. Are there rumblings in NO on this issue? If so, please post a link. No comments or whispers about his and Brees’ relationship during some contentious contract disputes by Brees. Contract disputes are between management and player, not coach and player. And there were several instances of AR and MM clashing on the sidelines. No somehow placing blame on Payton for his safety’s epic mistake against Minny in the playoffs. Did anyone blame MM for the blown onside kick during the Seattle debacle? Maybe some, as I'm sure some blamed Payton for the misplay of his safety. And your point is...? Nope - it would have been ride or die with Payton. I’m sure of it. Sarcasm is indeed deep with this one. The question isn't whether the fans would have been as patient or accepting of Payton. They wouldn't. I'm sure there are those in NE who are unhappy with Belichick. Again, what is your point? That fans are fickle and demand success or heads on a platter? How about that. But Payton has continued to adjust and modify his offense and effectively build the defense. MM didn't.

It could be argued that TT's big mistake was hiring MM rather than Sean Payton. But then again, hindsight is always 20/20; and, of course, hindsight changes with the political/social whims of the times. If Cobb had been allowed to walk, and done well with another team (ala Hayward), we'd still be pointing that out as a big mistake. Its all relative.

I know that MM was said to be the pick at HC because of his history in GB. I also know that SP reportedly preferred NO. That being said, we know how both teams, and candidates, work the press as one, or the other, loses interest in the job/hire. I doubt that we will ever know if SP was actually preferred by GB or if he preferred NO.

One thing we do know, SP evolved his offense over time. His use of Hill proves this. Separately, It appears that TT greatly emasculated MM by ruling GB with an iron fist. Players noticed this. MM had difficulty holding the team accountable because he could not hold tough practices, play key players in pre-season, call players out etc. He lost his authority.

Where was it reported that Peyton preferred NO? I remember reading that he really wanted the GB job. It was one of the most coveted jobs in the league at the time.

Bill Michaels. I also said that it may have been put out there by his people after TT went for MM. no one really knows what happened first.

True. I was just curious because anytime I have looked into the process and read articles of those who were involved, Peyton was the pick, but TT went with someone who had been in "the club" before.

Logged

"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."

I think that it needs to be considered as a possibility that the offense frequently started the season flat because it did not play as a unit in the pre-season. It was TT's decision to sit, nearly, the entire unit. I think that needs to be a coach's decision. If players are slacking during preseason practice then the HC should have the power to play them extensively in preseason as well. Furthermore, the GM and HC need to be working hand in hand. Clearly, that was not happening in GB as TT withdrew more and more all while making unilateral decisions without consulting MM.

The podcasts, indeed, are a mixed bag but are divided up fairly well into segments and hours of the radio broadcast with all pre-recorded commercials filtered out.

Logged

The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will. - Vince Lombardi

Or it could simply be a team decision. After all, how many people howled with outrage after Jordy hurt his knee during an exhibition game? A chief complainer was also Rodgers. So, play your starters in meaningless games, and taet ke a chance on them getting hurt; or give them enough time to hopefully to get ready for the regular season. Just be aware that either way, you leave yourself open to criticism.